Introduction
Individuals have long used media in creative ways to share intimate feelings. From love letters, intimate diaries, Polaroid pictures, to a series of smartphone apps, they all offer individuals opportunities to express romantic interest and sustain intimacy. Sexting, the sending of self-made sexually explicit messages through digital media, is a modern incarnation of a long development of uses of media for romantic and sexual expression. Through smartphone and social media apps, individuals can easily create and share intimate messages. At the advent of cellular technology, intimate mobile messaging was limited to text and emoticons . In recent years, photos, videos and emoji have offered a broader range of possibilities to express oneself visually. Emoji are sometimes even manipulated to communicate their own sexting language, with flowers and vegetables as visual metaphors (Evans, 2017). Because of these changes in technological capabilities, the meaning of the term âsextingâ has also rapidly evolved. While originally a combination of âsexâ and âtextingâ, the development of smartphones and other devices have expanded sexting to include sexual imagery.
Although sexting is merely a digital extension of the age-old human tendency to create sexually explicit images, visual forms of sexting are also a source of concern, as digital images can easily be disseminated to a wider audience. The further distribution of intimate photographs has led to tragic cases. For example, when a sexting image spreads to a broader audience, it can lead to bullying and reputational damage for the person who has created the sexting message. Often victims of these incidents are blamed for creating these types of photographs in the first place, as doing so made them vulnerable for the abuse. The early literature on sexting treats the creation of sexually explicit images as a deviant behaviour (see for an overview e.g., Döring, 2014; Kosenko, Luurs, & Binder, 2017). However, scholars and prevention workers have argued that the mere creation of sexting photographs can be considered normal. Moreover, in recent years, research on sexting behaviour has also observed its positive role in relationship satisfaction (Burkett, 2015; Drouin, Coupe, & Temple, 2017). Nowadays, sexting is only considered to be problematic, when it occurs under pressure, is the result of coercion , or if the content is distributed without authorization (Choi, Van Ouytsel, & Temple, 2016; Temple, 2015).
The tendency to blame the individuals who sext, rather than blaming individuals who breach the trust or engage in abusive behaviours, can be partly situated in some media, policy and even academic discourses which tend to neglect individualsâ, and more particularly young peopleâs, agency to make deliberate and sensible choices regarding their sexuality and sexual intimacy . Young people, and particularly girls, are seen as a passive audience or even victims of sexualization trends in popular media content. This leads to a lot of efforts to convince potential sexters to refrain, as they are the potential authors of sexualized content, which could be used against them (Spooner & Vaughn, 2016).
In this context, sexting is often associated with the sexualization of media culture, the proliferation of sexualized images and discussions on sexual practices (Gill, 2012). However, pointing at, or even blaming, mediaâs sexual content can contextualize individualsâ sharing of intimate messages, but might also distract from discussing core issues within sexual and broader relational ethics namely mutual consent, pleasure and respect (Carmody, 2005). Sexting incidents are often related with, on the one hand, pressure or even abuse within intimate relationships or, on the other hand, privacy breaches (Hasinoff, 2014). Framing sexting as inherently harmful stifles young peopleâs potential for sexual exploration , but reframing sexting as normal behaviour while acknowledging that it bears some level of risk offers young people a level of agency to decide for themselves (Lim, 2013). To be able to make informed decisions, not only the relational context wherein sexting occurs is important, but also individualsâ knowledge about the specific characteristics of digital media they use for intimate communication.
Social Media Affordances
In order to explore the opportunities for intimate self-disclosure that social media provide, as well as the potential risks associated with it, we build upon the affordances framework proposed by boyd (2011, 2014). As sexting content is transmitted one-to-one through, for instance, mobile media apps, they are shared within a networked public which differs from traditional publics in offline spaces. Four affordances shape the context of social media and how self-disclosures , especially intimate ones, may be facilitated or challenged. Those affordances of digital media are persistence , visibility , spreadability and searchability .
Digital data in general, and digitally transmitted images in particular, may become persistent. What has been sent in a snap, may be stored and transmitted to others, now or later. Even some applications that are considered safe for sexting, in which images disappear after a set amount of time, can be bypassed through technical tricks or third-party apps. For instance, security breaches in third-party providersâ systems led to the online publication of thousands of images shared through the popular instant messaging application Snapchat , from which a significant proportion were sexually explicit pictures (Piwek & Joinson, 2016). Not only can a sexting message be stored and potentially forwarded to others, but also it may resurface later, for instance on websites or closed groups in social network sites where those pictures are âexposedâ. The persistence of social media content may lead to a context collapse , for instance, when personal information that was shared with only one, or several other contacts, for specific purposes is taken out of context and reaches other individuals (Marwick & boyd, 2014). Moreover, if the relationship sours, the messages that were once protected may be used against its creator (Mitchell, Finkelhor, Jones, & Wolak, 2012).
In this context, the exposure of what once was an intimate message secretly shared between partners may become visible for an unintended audience. Whereas in the offline world audiences may be more visible and sizeable, in online networks, âinteractions are often public by default, private through effortâ (boyd, 2014, p. 14). However, privacy settings and other security measures provide only an illusory sense of control over oneâs personal information. First, privacy settings regulate only some aspects of personal information visibility with respect to other...